An article I liked, it's kinda in the same theme of most of my recent rants but more nicely put.

Quote:

In order to promote change, we must first create a dialogue. By belittling or criticizing other trainers, we build walls and prevent conversation. There is a lot that reward-based trainers can learn from traditional or remote collar trainers, and vice versa.

A FB friend took issue with this part of the article because she felt that wasn't exclusive to "positive" trainers

Quote:

This doesnít mean that we cannot have strong opinions about the best way to train a dog. I strongly believe that dogs can be trained more quickly and effectively without the use of force. I believe that itís important to engage dogs in training and to give them choices. I want my dogs to be active rather than passive partners in the training process. I also believe that as a professional, itís my responsibility to use the same techniques with my clientsí dogs that I do with my own, and to avoid techniques that I believe have the possibility of causing harm.

I ended up writing up a minor monologue back to her while I was working things out in my head and figured I would throw it up here since it kinda goes along with our recent CM posts and Crossover trainer thread

Quote:

I really do think there is a fundamental difference in the way training is viewed or gone about that goes deeper than if you use aversive or don't use them. I believe that in essence the use of a prong collar or use of a clicker is not what is telling about a trainer but rather rather something else, something less superficial.

I 've used a prong collar and have no issue with e collars or what have you. But maybe it's because I came from the other "side" that I see that change in how I approach training, dogs, life etc. It wasn't a change in method as much as it was a change of perspective.

To me it's less of a matter of whether or not you use a check chain, an ecollar, a prong collar, a clicker, a gentle leader, a harness or whatever. It's that difference I see in how dogs and learning is approached. Not that it's a bad thing. It isn't. Lord knows I can't teach house manners for love or money, mainly because I don't care that much about them but also because I don't have the patience. Some one with an ecollar and consistency could probably do ten times better then I could with a clicker and a bag of meat.

So no, I don't think any of what she said in there that you quoted is exclusive to positive training. But I do think it's more common and I do think it's much more cultivated in the positive training community overall.

I'm not under any illusion that positive training is solely positive. It's not. It's stressful, you withhold rewards, you make them work for it and a lot of thinking is required on the dogs part. Different trainers have different ideas of what is 'allowed' and what isn't. Some are ok with verbal corrections, some aren't. Some are ok with none reward markers, some aren't. Some are ok with things like squirt bottles or cans or pennies, some aren't. Which is why I believe it's not positive training but rather to use the same word again, fundamental differences in how training is viewed while all of us having the same overall desire.

And I do think that one of the biggest hurtles is misinformation. I learned a lot from training heel using a prong collar and I got a darn good heel out of it too along with some awesome timing. But maybe it's because I came from there that it frustrates me so much to see people in the 'balanced' camp repeatedly denounce and mock something without understanding it. The amount of times I see it reduced to "ignore the bad and reward the good" is amazing along with the limitations I see put on it, when in reality that only thing that limits you is your imagination, creativity and skills. I think that also frustrates me because I used to say the same things and really ended up eating my words.

But also because I came from there and understood it it drives me up a wall to see people continually see no place for an ecollar or a prong collar or what have you. Whether or not it's needed for training really to me isn't the issue. If that was the case nothing but consistency would be in our arsenal. But rather what works for the person and works for the dog.

I took a big step out of my comfort zone when I started training Traveler and an even bigger one with Didgie when I went to almost elusively shaping things. But I learned a ton and have to say I'm hooked. But that doesn't negate what other training styles have to teach me and it doesn't mean I walk through life with blinders on. But I do see a change in myself that I like. A change that I think shines through my dogs and how we work together.

I will say that I used to be against aversive tools and most corrections. Even Gentle Leaders I said I didn't like and wouldn't use - and then I "crumbled" and bought one and use it all the time. Said I would never use a prong collar, and while I still haven't ever used a prong collar (Juno is soooo not the dog to use one on, with her dog reactivity and people wariness), in the future I don't think I'd totally write one off. Same with e-collars.

I am just not always that skilled with just a clicker and a bag of treats. As much as I want to be. Sometimes I need a little help in addition to my treats, but it took a while and a lot of research for me to be open to other tools.

I did use cans of pennies when Juno was a puppy, for things that needed to stop NOW like "you can't tackle my 2-year-old nephew to the ground even though it looks fun when he's running". Nowadays though I am starting to wonder if that played a role in ruining her and why her anxiety really comes out in regards to loud, unexpected noises (mainly only when we are outside the house). Live and learn I guess but not something I'll ever use again.

__________________

And if all of it is for naught, well at least I took a shot
Juno 2009 :: Happy 2000 :: Lucy 2006 :: Cajun 2013